According to the article "Each study gauged participants' so-called visual reaction times -- how long it took them to press a button in response to seeing a stimulus. Reaction time reflects a person's mental processing speed, and so is considered an indication of general intelligence."
Visual acuity reaction time is not a test of intelligence. Despite arguments against traditional intelligence tests I think we could agree that this is not a measure of intelligence. In the spirit or transparency though, the faster you complete most IQ tests, the better you do, but NOT visual acuity.
As a psychologists trained in IQ tests, there are very few cultural references in standard IQ tests like the Wechsler and the Standford-Binet. In the 60s there were unfair references that caused culture biases (like the use of the word "regatta" which few kids in the hood would know about), however, all have been eliminated.
There are a number of subtests on IQ tests like this that are comprehensive. It includes things like matching a pattern on blocks, memory tests, verbal tests, symbol matching, etc. It gets updated every few years. There are a number of other IQ tests that are NOT particularly culture free, but not every IQ test is a real IQ test. There are a number of tests that approximate IQ for the purpose of speed and cost, but when talking about patterns since the 1800s, let's stick to the accepted IQ tests.
It is a well established fact that people of today are significantly more intelligent than people 100 years ago.
Flynn effect - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Our access to information over the last 100 years through TV (yes TV, Told ya mom!) and the internet has caused us to increase our general intelligence, problem solving ability and logic overtime.
Simply put, the author is a dip***t.